The general results of the processing of the monitoring of all the project plans were presented to the Strategy and Absorption Capacity working groups. Of all the project plans, the highest number (a total of 84) are expected to submit a project under priority axis 2 (Regional R and D centres). It is also this priority axis where the highest project costs are expected. Considering the project costs in the individual years, the highest costs are expected after 2011 (see Graph No. 3 in the Appendix). In terms of geographical distribution, most project plans come from the South Moravian Region and the fewest from the Liberec Region.
The project plans whose costs exceed the limit of 25 million € were analysed in further detail on 5th and 6th March, namely in terms of the relevance of the project plan to the selected priority axis, its state of preparation, internal logic and interconnectedness and synergy with other project plans. There were a total of 49 such project plans. The remaining project plans were evaluated until the middle of April 2008.
Some common critical areas have arisen from a more detailed analysis of the projects over 25 million €, chiefly:
Justification of the project: Most of the project plans lack a specific justification of their need in the region, target groups, entities on the market; in particular, there is a problem in understanding competitiveness as an economic category and in insufficient encouragement of (future) demand for the activity in the supported or newly created facilities and its outcomes. In the project plans primarily directed towards priority axis 2, the connection to the application sphere and its needs are often weak, the significance for regional competitiveness is contained only in general claims, the description of the future ‘clients’ is very vague.
Relevance: The requirements of the priority axes directed towards the application sphere are often not taken into consideration. Generally, the focus of the project plans is often too wide; the description of the utilisation of the created infrastructure is frequently too general.
Logic of the project plan: A concrete specification of the interconnectedness with other activities (start-up grants, the application sphere, human resources, etc.) is often lacking.
Partnership: Generally, the question of partnership in the project plans is paid little attention, partners and ‘clients’ are confused, the majority of the project plans have many types of partners without sufficient specification, the problem of partners from the private sector (considering that the project would be supported from public funds) also arises.
Adequateness of the budgets: The relation of the costs to the expected outcomes and results is often problematic.
Financial sustainability: Most project plans do not plan on the physical renewal (reproduction) of property, for the most part they rely on the state budget, with further financial resources being negligible.
As for the project plans directed towards priority axis 4, the project plans mostly do not take the ‘external’ needs of the target groups or future employers of the students of the school into consideration), only the internal needs of the school, and also the investments focus on the buildings, not on the technologies. The transition and provision of new quality instruction in the new areas are also often described insufficiently. The significance of co-financing is often neglected and financial sustainability is described in very general terms, often as an automatic transition to the existing institutional resources.
In response to the critical areas of the project plans, the Management Body is now preparing a series of seminars or workshops with the goal of succinctly explaining the requirements of the RDIOP in the context of the solidarity policy and the consequences for the preparation of the project plans and providing recommendations and guidelines for elaborating the project plans into the form of future applications.
Along with that, short answers will be prepared as well and published on the website of the ministry.
Moreover, individual meetings for the potential applicants of large projects are being prepared where i.a. the information in the project sheets will be augmented and verified.
For the potential applicants of other projects, the Management Body is preparing meetings in groups with the goal of informing them on the aims of the Management Body concerning specific requirements arising from the RDIOP and consulting the applicants on the current problems.
The preparation of several forms of technical assistance for the future applicants will also take place.
To ensure effective synergy between the individual projects, the Management Body is planning thematic facilitated meetings of applicants from the same field (or from fields where cooperation is to be expected). The goal will be to identify potential duplication of projects, allow the establishment of contacts and stimulate common aims of future research or interconnectedness of the infrastructures under construction.
Contacts and Useful Links
Dear readers,
Should you have any question concerning the European Fund for Regional Development, or the Research and Development for Innovations Operational Programme, please do not hesitate to contact us, we will gladly assist you.
Contact us at: opvyzkum@msmt
cz
Odbor řízení Operačního programu Výzkum a vývoj pro inovace
(Research and Development for Innovations Operational
Programme Management Department)
MŠMT (MEYS)
Karmelitská 7
118 12 Praha 1
Further useful information on the structural funds and all the operational programmes in the Czech Republic can be found on the website www.strukturalni-fondy.cz
or directly at the European Union portal http://europa.eu/index_en.htm
